Artificial selection reveals sex differences in the genetic basis of sexual attractiveness

Mutual mate choice occurs when males and females base mating decisions on shared traits. Despite increased awareness, the extent to which mutual choice drives phenotypic change remains poorly understood. When preferences in both sexes target the same traits, it is unclear how evolution will proceed...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS 2018-05, Vol.115 (21), p.5498-5503
Main Authors: Gosden, Thomas P., Reddiex, Adam J., Chenoweth, Stephen F.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biological evolution
Biological Sciences
Cuticular hydrocarbons
Evolution
Females
Fitness
Fruit flies
Gender aspects
Gender differences
Genomics
Hydrocarbons
Males
Mate selection
Natural selection
Reproductive fitness
Sex
Sex differences
Sexes
Sexual selection
Sexuality
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Mutual mate choice occurs when males and females base mating decisions on shared traits. Despite increased awareness, the extent to which mutual choice drives phenotypic change remains poorly understood. When preferences in both sexes target the same traits, it is unclear how evolution will proceed and whether responses to sexual selection from male choice will match or oppose responses to female choice. Answering this question is challenging, as it requires understanding, genetic relationships between the traits targeted by choice, mating success, and, ultimately, fitness for both sexes. Addressing this, we applied artificial selection to the cuticular hydrocarbons of the fly Drosophila serrata that are targeted by mutual choice and tracked evolutionary changes in males and females alongside changes in mating success. After 10 generations, significant trait evolution occurred in both sexes, but intriguingly there were major sex differences in the associated fitness consequences. Sexually selected trait evolution in males led to a genetically based increase in male mating success. By contrast, although trait evolution also occurred in females, there was no change in mating success. Our results suggest that phenotypic sexual selection on females from male choice is environmentally, rather than genetically, generated. Thus, compared with female choice, male choice is at best a weak driver of signal trait evolution in this species. Instead, the evolution of apparent female ornamentation seems more likely due to a correlated response to sexual selection on males and possibly other forms of natural selection.
ISSN:0027-8424
1091-6490
DOI:10.1073/pnas.1720368115